Search the Community

Was it in breach? I genuinely don't know, but was there any difference between what Venkys did with Kentaro, and what Fosun International (Wolves) did with super agent, Jorge Mendes. I believe he operated in an advisory role, although in that case, it was more successful. My instinct is Kentaro (and indirectly SEM/Anderson) knew exactly how far they could go in their 'consultancy' capacity, and probably stayed on the right side of legal. Venkys were horrendously naive, ostracised good football people who genuinely cared for BRFC, and got themselves very quickly in to a hot, toxic mess. Ultimately though, they signed off on everything Kentaro recommended. If JA (or Kentaro) were invited by Venkys to control football matters on their behalf, is that illegal? They didn't seemingly have any ownership stakes... By the way, this all unfolded at least 13 years ago. The Rao's have had plenty of time to recover the situation and run the club in an acceptable way. Whether they were badly advised, stupid, naive, spooked or whatever else, they've had a hell of a long time to right any wrongs. Personally, I don't think they have ever got close to repairing the damage. EDIT: I asked AI whether there was any difference between Rovers and Wolves... Yes, there is a significant difference. The Blackburn/Kentaro situation involved explicit contractual agreements giving an agency material influence over club operations and transfers, which breached specific Football Association (FA) and Premier League rules at the time. The Wolves/Jorge Mendes situation was determined by the English Football League (EFL) and FA to be a consultancy and a close working relationship, but without Mendes holding an official role or contractual power to influence club policies, thus complying with regulations. In essence, the Blackburn case involved a formal, legally binding agreement that gave an agent control, which is explicitly banned, while the Wolves case involved a close but informal working relationship that, while raising concerns from rival clubs, was deemed to fall within the bounds of the rules.

Thing is it's been a loss of approx £20m a season for a while now. If we had another 12,000 fans turn up paying £400 for a ST that would still mean a loss of £15m a season. So Why?! Why do they bother? Well, they don't bother at all actually, apart from sending money there is zero involvement and certainly no passion, no love, no care, nothing. It's obvious to anyone even with a limited understanding of the situation that the only possible way you can make money from Blackburn Rovers, and even then it would be a one season clawing back off as much as possible (no way would we stick around up there), would be to get promoted to the Premier League. Yet when we nearly make the play offs it all goes wrong. Managers leave, player signings go wrong at the last minute. The club can't do enough to mess it up. And what happens? Nothing. The same guy who has run the show for 15 years is still here. The same guy who regularly oversees this fall off is allowed to continue in his role. Why is that? Surely there should be some accountability? "Oh well, they missed out on promotion again, I'll just send another 20 million quid". Nah, that can't be it surely? Who benefits from this arrangement that is the ownership of BRFC? It is guaranteed, without question, that someone somewhere is making money out of this. Any sane business whose share price has taken a drop (or even if it hadn't to be honest) would have acted. Why? What is their Why? (Simon Sinek). Promotion? The love of the game? Dragging their brand through the mud for years isn't it either. You'd demand promotion or cut your losses and sell surely? Unless of course it's not just their decision to sell?? And that of course is why there is much panic when we get near those playoffs. Don't get promoted - there's a higher level of scrutiny in the Premier League. They'll want to look at the accounts. Just who is on the wage bill??? Let's get into the detail. Again, someone (or a group of individuals) is / are making a lot of money here. There are too many key characters involved who clearly don't care for the club, the fans, our history, for it not to be the case.

I'd have thought even you would have dropped the old FFP excuse by now Chaddy. It has been nothing more than a convenient excuse used to explain a lack of interest/investment from the owners. The last 4-5 years have (if anyone needed it) provided proof that our problems are nothing to do with FFP, and probably never have been. Fortunately for those who hold BRFC hostage a shiny new excuse came along just in time - the Indian legal action. Now that one is wearing off they've just given up altogether and are effectively admitting that the owners just don't want to invest, not that they can't.

I mean even if you didnt know anything whatsoever about the history of BRFC anyone with half a brain cell proof reading that should twig that couldnt possibly be correct. As I said in response to Paul reporting no pies in the Riverside for the first time ever, no-one gives the shiniest shit down there.

Hi - I'm Adam Dinsmore from the MMU Institute of Sport in Manchester. We've just launched an ESRC-funded project on the sociology of football in the North of England in partnership with the Football Supporters Association (FSA). We spoke last month with Glen Mullan, who you may know as Chair of The BRFC Action Group. Glen advised that BRFCS was the ideal place to reach Rovers supporters who might be interested in contributing to the project. In a nutshell, we'd like to speak with as many Blackburn Rovers supporters as possible about the role that the club has played in their life story. The project is run by fans for fans, and we hope to contribute to public discourse around the new Independent Football Regulator. Particularly, the IFR's legal duty to protect the heritage of English football. Your experiences and perspectives will directly inform policy recommendations on what heritage protection should mean for supporters and their communities. What's involved: Participants will sit for a one-on-one interview conducted online or in-person. The interview will focus on your relationship with Blackburn Rovers and how the club and town have changed over time. We expect interviews to last 60–90 minutes. All data will be anonymised and stored securely in accordance with university ethical guidelines and GDPR. All participants receive a £50 Amazon voucher for their time and invitations to a series of events on the sociology of football where we will share our findings (planned late 2026/early 2027). You can withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. Who we're looking for: We're seeking Rovers supporters of all ages and backgrounds. You don't need to be a season ticket holder or attend every match - we're interested in hearing from anyone who identifies as a Blackburn Rovers fan, regardless of how you follow the club. If you are interested in being interviewed, you can sign-up at Beacons.ai/BRFCStudy or contact Dr Adam Dinsmore directly at a.dinsmore@mmu.ac.uk. I’ve attached a flyer (below) with a QR code that can be forwarded to anyone who may be interested. We’ll be handing them out near Roverstore before the Derby game on Saturday if anyone wants to discuss the project there.

We're pretty unusual as far as I can tell in the badges that we've had during our long history. There's the uncertainty / confusion / lack of evidence around the Maltese cross, but even if it was adopted and used it wasn't really a club badge and certainly doesn't appear to have been worn for very long, maybe the first couple of years or so at most. Then - I hope I am right - we didn't have any emblem or badge through most of our history from say the 1880s until the 1970s - aside from special occasions like the 60 FA Cup final when we wore the town coat of arms on the shirt Then from the 70s into the 80s we had a boring and limited effort of the 'red rose' badge with simply 'BRFC' underneath. I would be interested to know the background to this - I suspect a decision was made in the 70s in keeping with the direction of travel in football that we needed an emblem or badge and this was the easiest/quickest thing they could come up with. I also suspect that by the late 80s they realised with the rapidly changing world of design, trademarks, kits and everything else that the red rose badge wasn't acceptable in the modern era and we needed to get ourselves a proper badge with the club name on it, which is how we ended up with the current badge. The current badge - which has been through a few different forms and reincarnations - has a confusing history too. As per the above this appeared on club programmes as far back as the 60s, but not on the shirts until the late 80s/early 90s. Strange that we would design and adopt a badge to use on programmes and letterheads etc. but not use it on kits and then use a totally different badge of the red rose on kits - maybe because that one was cheaper and easier to transfer to shirts than the quite complex design of the current one. It probably all comes back to the uniqueness of the blue and white halves which have always been the club's USP and for what it is known around the world and this previously negated the need to have a badge. Obviously in the modern era we need a modern badge that meets trademark requirements and can be mass produced. Back to the anniversary, I'd have preferred either for us to 'update' the current badge for the occasion or if we wanted to go traditional either not have a badge at all for the special kit or perhaps use the town coat of arms version for the special occasion.

I see the '150 range' is now on sale in the club shop. Deary deary me. Zero effort or imagination gone into that lot. But we still have the White Rose of Yorkshire adorning everything. I get that monochrome is cheap and that's what BRFC is these days but surely they could do it at least in black or gold rather than white?

Fans deserve the truth Minutes of the Blackburn Rovers Fans’ Forum Meeting Monday 20th October 2025 – 6.30pm Present – Fans’ Forum Mark Hitchen John Wareing Savio Mathias Bharat Parmar Annette Birkbeck Steve Birtwell Terry Crawford Megan Longworth Duncan Miller Neil Duckworth Katie Hull Anne-Marie Riach Jakob Ward Present from BRFC Suhail Shaikh Chief Operating Officer Lynsey TalbotHead of Operations Yasir SufiHead of Commercial & Partnerships Adam OwenHead of Technical Development Matt WrightChief Financial Officer Rob GillHead of Media & Communications Rudy GestedeHead of Football operations Brett BakerHead of Football administration 1.Apologies for Absence Ray Williamson Zubair Bassa Tristan Stock Peter Bolton Zayd Rawoot 2.Matters Arising from the minutes of the previous meeting 14th July 2025 None. 3.Club Kits 2027-28 MH stated that he would pass the fan survey on kit design to the club’s kit supplier. DM asked why the adidas deal had been turned down YS asked where that information had come from DM stated Gary Aspden had stated in an interview with Soccer Bible YS stated we are still in a contract with Macron and cannot comment DM stated that report/rumours were rife that Castore/Umbro would be selected as the Issa brothers are their biggest investor and it was part of a wider attempt to engage them. Both YS and SS stated they didn’t believe it to be true that they were the largest investor. DM disagreed and asked if there was any truth to reports that Macron were seeking to take legal action against the club. SS asked where this information had come from and it may represent a breach the other way. YS stated that there are lots of rumours from fans and we must deal with facts – the facts are we are in a deal with Macron and the results of the tender process must be kept confidential. DM stated he knew adidas had put a good deal forward. SS replied that he didn’t believe the deal was good enough. DM asked if this was a purely financial opinion based on upfront payments and felt it was potentially short sighted. YS asked if he felt our supporters would be happy to pay 80 for a shirt. DM stated that he felt they would be happy to pay 80 for a quality product than 60 for an off the peg or substandard product. YS stated that many factors had to be considered. DM stated that it was disappointing in relation to Adidas Spezial given a Rovers Season ticket holder was the curator of that range. SS stated that we were never promised a Spezial range and without it being put in writing it cannot be considered. DM stated that given his relationship with the club and community Gary’s verbal assurances should count for something given Spezial is his brand. SS stated it is adidas’s brand and YS stated that as a great supporter of the club he wouldn’t be disclosing financial information (DM assured he wasn’t). SS stated that Gary was an employee of adidas and that a Spezial range wasn’t committed and offered to phone him to verify. SS stated that there is a template pattern that can’t be deviated from, but any new supplier will give us bespoke kits. 4.Pitch Maintenance / Drainage ND reported that he had investigated water levels on the River Darwen over the 13 years that public records are available. During that time the club had had four games postponed or abandoned and of the top 5 recorded river levels, Rovers had had home games on three of them. ND asked whether the outflow from the ground into the river had been checked on the day of the Ipswich game. LT replied that it had been checked a number of times, the last around 4.30pm, when the outflow was still above the river level. Rainfall records had shown that 77.2mm of rain had fallen at Ewood, compared to 57.7mm at Burnley and 54.1mm at Manchester United. LT stated that, after the postponement of the game at home to Portsmouth last season, the club had spoken to United Utilities and the Environment Agency. The club had proposed adding a sleeve to the drain and after some discussion it had been agreed that this could be done but that the club would need to fund the work. The work was actually plannedto be done that week. 5.Ipswich Game Abandonment Update MH noted that the abandoned game against Ipswich had now been re-arranged for Tuesday 2nd December, with season ticket holders having free access and anyone who had purchased tickets for the original fixture able to buy tickets at half price. YS confirmed that the decision was in line with the Club’s Charter 6.Lancashire Telegraph Communications MH asked what had led the club to ban reporters from the Lancashire Telegraph from attending the club. RobG replied that the relationship had been difficult for some time and the leaking of team news was the final straw for the club. He really would have preferred not to have to do this and he still hoped to get back to a normal relationship as soon as possible, although there was no immediate prospect of that. JW stated that it appears a growing trend at the club regarding unclear communication siting Jon Dahl Tomasson and Valerian Ismael being silenced or censored on certain topics, the club threatening fans with bans, and rumours and social media fallout surrounding Rudy Gestede which is not a good look for the club. 7.Court Case Update MW stated that the requirement by the Indian courts for the club’s owners to guarantee that a fund equal to any monies sent to the club be logged had now been removed. Responding to a question from JaW, this would not mean any increase in funds available, as they were already backing the club to agreed budgets. RudyG added that the club had brought in 10 new signings and there was a possibility of further signings in the January 2026 transfer window. DM asked if this would potentially give RG more room for new recruits and improved contracts, particularly given we have some headroom under FFP rules for a finite time. RG stated we had recruited 10 players this summer. MW stated the owners had funded the club to the level requested and will continue to do so, and with regards to FFP we clearly have some headroom due to the good business the club had done with the likes of Sam Szmodics and Adam Wharton, but JaW expressed concern about the number of players who had left the club in the Summer and subsequent team performances and the real possibility of a relegation fight. RG disagreed – Dominic Hyam, Lewis Travis, Callum Brittain and Harry Leonard had all wanted to leave the club. SM asked if there was any intention to recruit more players experienced in the Championship. RudyG replied that experience costs a lot of money and it was difficult to hire players ready to immediately compete in the league. DM stated that in the last meeting SS stated they were looking to get closer to a break even model where they wouldn’t be as reliant on owner funding. SS asked if DM thought this was possible, which he responded not if we want to stay in this division. MW stated that the budget from the owners had increased and was committed to around 20 million a season.which was the required amount in this division and all clubs faced the same problem. DM stated that while the FFP headroom exists why can’t the owners commit more and push for promotion, particularly given we finished 7th last year, relatively minimal investment could make all the difference, instead we appear to have cut back. DM stated that the disappointing thing from a fans point of view is that the legacy of the sale of a generational talent in Adam Wharton has been to keep us afloat while the owners battled a legal issue, whereas it should have meant reinvestment into new playing assets who could help take us to the next level. MW agreed and says he would also like to have seen that, but the reality is even with these sales we rely on owner funding. DM asked if 20 million was their ceiling, because we have been told for a long time that Venky’s CAN’T invest any more under P&S/FFP rules, whereas now it is clear they could invest more but they don’t want to. If so how long will they remain happy to lose 20 million year on year, and what is the end game for them as owners and us as supporters. There seems to be no point or end to it. MH stated that we accept big sales are needed but an opportunity to reinvest into the team isn’t made. DM stated that if they want to break the cycle of just losing 20 million each year something needs to change, and if they aren’t willing to do that the advice SS must give them as their trusted advisor is to sell the club. SS stated that there is no potential buyer and he came in at the time of the acquisition of the club. Both SS and MW stated that every football club is for sale, and if any of them can find a buyer they are willing to have a conversation. DM asked RG that while he had stated he thinks we will have a good season, what if we don’t? Since Steve Waggott left the structure at the club is unclear and if there is a decision to be made on the future of the head coach, who is responsible for that? SS stated it would be the owners decision, but they would propose it. DM asked specifically who would propose this as it is unclear where people’s remit starts and ends, and it was unclear who was assessing the performance of RG/SS or VI. RG stated that AO was responsible for assessing all coaching staff at the club, which extended to ValerienIsmael. KH asked if it is a concern that we may be relegated. RG stated that it is a concern but they believe it will be addressed and the statistics show that we are creating sufficient chances to score enough goals. 8.Fan Engagement Plan – Forum Constitution MH asked for any comments from fan groups about the current situation with the only communication route between fans and the club is through the Fans Forum. A constitution for the Forum was in the process of completion to sit alongside the club’s Fan Engagement Plan. ML stated that for Her Game Too the main issues were the lack of communications about the women’s team such that fans don’t even know when the fixtures are. SB and SM suggested that more open engagement was needed with the wider fan base. JaW said that We Are The Rovers was concerned about the reduction in the number of Forums and the fact the MOU signed by WATR has been ignored by the club since SW left. JaW felt that given the current mood the club should be welcoming more engagement rather than scaling back. DM pointed out that the 2 fan engagement plans from last season and this season when read side by side show all previous opportunities to grow and develop fan engagement have been scaled back, which will be a potential issue with the incoming football regulator. YS sited club interviews with VI, Rg and AO as examples of fan engagement. DM disputed this as engagement must be a 2 way process. DM stated that we need assurances the club is committed to fan engagement as during WATR discussions with the football regulator they highlighted real concerns with the direction in which the club have gone. AMR suggested that supporters want to feel a sense of inclusion. There was a wide ranging discussion about how consultation could attract a wider range of fans whilst still remaining a practical body. SS was open to receiving questions in advance from the fan base. YS added that the club would be happy to consider recording Forum meetings. DM suggested that there should be an affiliation process by the club for supporter groups. DM suggested that the FF needs to develop in line with regulatory advice on forming a Fan Engagement/Shadow Board. 9.Club Academy AO stated that the club had retained its Category 1 status in February with no issues. Renewal is one a 3 year schedule but with annual reviews in February. DM stated that it had been disappointing that there had been no Academy player on the pitch in the Swansea game, breaking a long continuous record. AO replied that both Scott Wharton and Hayden Carter being unavailable had been the issue at that game. AO stated that it was difficult to integrate young players into an unstable environment JaW stated he felt this was contradictory as Ismael was reportedly appointed on the back of his willingness to increase academy minutes, and questioned why the club had chosen to transition so heavily this summer. AO stated it became a transitional year because players wanted to leave. (Add para with AO’s stats) 10.Women’s Team ML asked why there was such a lack of information available about the women’s team for supporters following the radical changes over the Summer. MW replied that the changes regarding the women’s team were a result of the authorities trying to up the status of the two top divisions to fully professional contracts, aiming for 85% of occupancy at grounds. Costs would have to balloon with no prospect of any income form TV and media rights for at least a couple of years. Meeting this change would have resulted in a substantial increase in budgets which would have inevitably affected the funding of the men’s team and there was no evidence of support from fans for the women’s team in terms at attendances. The team had had a difficult start to the season because of all the changes over the Summer but were now set up to be competitive in League 4. ML stated that there appeared to be a lack of support for the team but MW disputed that and stated that the staffing for the new team that was asked for had been put in place. RobG stated that there had been a designated press officer for the women’s team for the last 7 or 8 years but no longer. The reality was that the team was now an amateur operation. 11.150th Anniversary Update DM asked why the planning meetings had stopped abruptly in the Summer. YS stated that the situation had moved on from planning to action and that more meetings were never planned. DM stated that this was not the premise these meetings were set up for and members of the committee had frequently been tasked with additional ongoing tasks, and YS should check the email correspondence regarding this which would confirm that supporter involvement was supposed to be ongoing. SS confirmed that 150 people had been nominated for honour caps and it was intended to issue all of them through the season. 85 of the nominees were dead and of the remaining, many were involved with the football business and therefore often busy elsewhere on match days. There were a significant number planned to attend the Derby game. These caps have been selected by the club and the fans on the committee had no input. DM asked for an update on behalf of Paul Salmon regarding a letter he wrote which it was agreed would be sent to FIFA, the FA, EFL and The Royal Family. SS stated this letter had been sent. DM expressed disappointment that Paul hadn’t been notified of this. (At the end of the meeting SS clarified that the letter had been sent to Mike Jackman, and not to any of the intended recipients.) 12.Equality, Diversity & Inclusion LT stated that the club had been awarded a Silver Code of Practice for EDI and were working towards a Gold award. LT reported that there had been a few reports of abuse by fans regarding discrimination. JaW asked whether anything had happened with these reports – LT agreed to check. 13.Any Other Business a) AMR asked about the poor TV service on screens in the Blues Bar. YS agreed to check the situation. b) JaW asked about progress in appointing a new Chief Executive Officer. SS stated that he had no update to give. DM asked if the fact Steve Waggott was still employed and on gardening leave was holding up a new appointment, and might this improve in the coming weeks. SS stated SW’s period of gardening leave was 12 months and it had no impact on any new appointment. He also highlighted that between Derek Shaw leaving and Steve Waggott joining the club operated without a CEO for 2 years. c) MH asked whether it would be appropriate to bring the February meeting forward to December or January. LT stated that it was very unlikely that December would be possible.

Well I'm not buying it. As much as I love BRFC I cant bring myself to buy it. If we had different owners I'd throw my money at it and buy it 'just because'. This lot can swivel on a fat one

That's what I think is most likely. Ed: I just checked and according two Wiki we're the probably 11th oldest club in England, we could be 10th but it's not clearly exactly when Big Club Birmingham were formed. So even if it became end of 1874, it would only make us the tenth oldest. We appear to have the 6th longest longevity in terms of names. We've only ever been Blackburn Rovers. Several of the 'older clubs' had completely different names or were repurposed cricket teams or shinney teams. We've always been BRFC, always been a football club.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 we want our BRFC back VENKYS OUT! PASHA OUT! GESTEDE OUT!

The blue and white shirts on match day are My Team but BRFC is not my Club under this ownership.

Can’t say I’ve seen many goals this season but even the ones I have it has been verging on polite applause from me. Not because my passion for Blackburn Rovers as a ‘thing’ is waning, the opposite, it’s just a visceral dislike of what the regime is providing - no pressure to achieve and the resulting poor players with a poor manager in a soulless, decaying ground. The soul of BRFC now resides elsewhere and we need to fight for it, unfortunately that won’t happen with the Ewood attendees, so it’s Glen’s campaigns or it’s nothing.

Funnily enough, I received a phone call this evening from someone presenting themselves as BRFC Privy. I could swear it was a lady pretending to be a man. Anyway, the point is that they wanted me to pass on that Tavares, although he has good knowledge of the English language, is the only one of our new signings who hasn't found a proper house yet. He is also investigating the reasons behind his lack of intensity, including whether buying a new Tesla might be a contributing factor, as well as other aspects like mattresses and food. As I understand it, things get complicated because his girlfriend isn't settled in the area and wants to move to Scandinavia, and he feels very let down by Travis leaving, as well as the pitch at Ewood. I am certainly not claiming any ITK - no badge necessary - just passing on information that might settle some nerves. Our data approach only fails in one of ten cases, and money, of course, cannot buy success.

I genuinely don’t know what to propose other than an empty stadium (and they are doing that well enough on their own). We aren’t BRFC/Rovers any more, we are a toy, a play thing in the corner that they have forgotten and don’t want to play with. They have systematically overseen unmitigated carnage, yet don’t give a shit. I despise them, all they stand for, and the fact the Rovers Trust thought they were suitable for 10 pieces of silver. Rotten to the core. I love my club, I hate Venkys. I wonder why folk still turn up to support this criminal regime?

He was a dud in all his previous jobs except for a fluke season at Barnsley and he’s still a dud. As it stands he’s taking us down to league one. If the brains at Ewood care about that they’d bin him tomorrow. But we all know it’s not going to happen. The season is over RIP BRFC

It's down to a functional, competent and best interests of the football club board of directors and CEO's job to continually push the ownership for what they need. That doesn't happen here as we don't have a real board just one guy pulling strings as he sees fit,previously from the shadows. And to him and his cronies it's all about trying to show the owners they can continually reduce costs or at best run to the same budget year in year out and remain in this league whilst growing a new crop of players to sell. For this he'll be paid several hundred grand a year plus expenses and whatever else he can cream off whilst swanning around England as the Mr Big of BRFC. That's it top to bottom it's his own comfort zone stacking up his own pension pot whilst keeping the ownership pacified. They are obviously the root cause but they rely on the likes of him in the day to day direction and he imo is captaining their boat to nowhere quite happily.

Either that or Baradji will be sold after BRFC got him fit in January !

Oh no! I was thinking last night when I saw the rain was carrying on into today that this just wouldn't be playable. If I were the club last night I would seriously have thought about taking a better safe than sorry approach and calling it off at 8am before the Stoke fans set off. If this game isn't played in full then it's a disaster for BRFC from an optics perspective. I'd much rather take the flack for being too cautious than be known as the club who constantly abandons/postpones games late in the day.

I'd suggest maybe Lambert a bit like Eustace albeit less effective in that he wanted results first and wasn't brought in and didn't have any intentions of all the above stuff. But yeah other than that whether it be Kean, Bowyer, Coyle, Mowbray, JDT and now Ismael there has always been a 'project' running alongside the bread and butter of results which takes over from it. The sad thing is that in both JDT and Eustace - for totally differing reasons but both very effective - they had people here that could deliver for them. Eustace showed he could do it on a shoestring budget without the need for some elaborate network and scouting, and JDT showed he could do it whilst handing debuts and game time to a raft of academy players, most of whom proved themselves to not be good enough yet were given plenty of opportunity at Championship level whilst we remained competitive. In avoiding both of the above we now seem to have gone down a third route - totally ditched the academy model, totally ditched the 'tried and tested' experience model, and ended up with a massively inferior manager working with a raft of players not good enough. Idiots gambling with the club's future and Championship status, for no good reason other than to perhaps benefit third parties outside of BRFC.

Anyone noticed the Privy account has gone quiet since being outed as a supposed brfc employee

And that is exactly the situation we face.The interview tells all we need to know...individuals on Easy St,no pressure to achieve with no targets or expectations set from those in control of the Club.The good ship BRFC, with no Captain at the Helm, just bobbing along in the middle of nowhere. Its shyte.

With everything happening also caught up on the news that brfc privy was found out!! And then calling a fan a drug user. Jeez

Just maybe Baradji is not fit til Xmas or later, and Hickman is his replacement.. Guy from Hibs replaces Hyam. So many strange transfers in 15 years, anything is possible at BRFC.

Yes Im sure that was the thinking. Mark BRFC flagged it up earlier as the likely plan all along. I reckon Tronsrad would have been gone as well had Baradji not had a serious medical issue. How we do on the pitch this season does not seem to be a priority with the regime. Just as making the play offs did not seem to be important when VI came in even though we were comfortably in the top 6 when he arrived. It's all absolutely scandalous. I mean what's the point in any of it? We're only existing to pay Pasha/Gestede/VI a handsome wage for as long as possible.